Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since 2009, the Gabii Project, an international archaeological initiative led by Nicola Terrenato and the University of Michigan, has been investigating the ancient Latin town of Gabii, which was both a neighbor of, and a rival to, Rome in the first millennium BC. The story of Gabii, like that of many ancient cities, is one of growth, transformation, and diminishment. In this volume, editors Laura M. Banducci and Anna Gallone highlight the close but sometimes tense relationship between where people live, work, trade, and bury their dead. We learn that, contrary to what you may have read elsewhere about the Roman world, the distinction between spaces of the living and spaces of the dead was not so clear-cut. Areas considered to be “within the city,” or what “being in the city” implied shifted in the minds of the locals as their priorities and needs changed. Assembled in an innovative digital format, the story of the site is presented three times in a “layered” structure: the first, titled “The Story,” explains the narrative of the excavation area in a simple chronological way. The second layer, “More,” contains the explanation of the phasing and the features of the site and their interpretation. The third layer contains the stratigraphic description and the technical reports on specialist materials. The volume is beautifully illustrated with traditional photographs and drawings, as well as an interactive 3D model based on photogrammetric models produced at the time of excavation. The 3D model is linked throughout the text by individual stratigraphic unit numbers and archaeological features. A series of interactive maps of the site, including GIS line-drawings and orthorectified aerial photographs, provide further spatial details.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".